As the meat of various civilian disarmament proposals passes through the legislative sausage making mash-up, all eyes are on the Senate Judiciary Committee to see what emerges. As Sam Stein laid out in yesterday’s HuffPo, the assault weapons ban may have to die so that other gun control measures might live to receive a Presidential signature. The big question is how the Judiciary work product is ultimately crafted. From wsj.com: “Senate Democratic leaders expect a gun bill to move to the Senate floor that includes most of the proposals backed by President Barack Obama, with the notable exception of a ban on military-style, semiautomatic weapons, a top aide to Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said.” But while that would seem to be a good thing, just because the Judiciary kielbasa doesn’t include an AWB in the mix doesn’t necessarily mean it’s dead . . .

Back to HuffPo:

If the bill emerges from the Judiciary Committee without an assault weapons ban in it, then Reid will allow for the ban to be introduced as an amendment on the Senate floor. If the bill emerges from the Judiciary Committee with an assault weapons ban in it, the expectation is that Reid will allow for a vote to strip it out. Leadership prefers the former, as it would give more conservative Democrats the chance to publicly say they beat back the ban. If the latter were to take place, it would put Reid in an uncomfortable position of allowing for the procedural axing of a measure that remains popular in the party.

And we sure wouldn’t want Harry to be uncomfortable. Did you catch that, though? If the bill comes out of Judiciary sans AWB, moderate Dems and those in swing states will (after breathing a HUGE sigh of relief) be able to throw their hands up and say, “Gee, I tried to ban those scary weapons of war to keep them off of our streets, but he NRA is just too powerful!”

As for the GOP . . .

A senior aide to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said Republican support would depend on what the bill says. Mr. McConnell has said he would closely watch what happens in the Judiciary Committee.

So because you choose to live under further Tyranny, your indifferent to the rights of others. Why is this mentality so pervasive among gun owners? We should be concerned about the infringement of the rights of all.

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Which part of this are the Republicans at war with? Personally, I’m outraged at the infringement of anyones rights.

If magazine capacity ban lives this is not a good thing. I don’t want to be paying hundreds of dollars for standard capacity mags a year from now.

Every single police force in the country finds standard capacity mags necessary for “defending” the public… based on that alone, a politician shouldn’t be able to justify lessening my ability to defend myself.

Well, total fascist disarmament memes were floated in the same spirit that Main Street Terrorists Lurking Under Your Bed were in 2001: to facilitate the passage of laws that under less hysterical and reactive conditions would not be tolerated. Thus we got the PATRIOT Act (crime against the Fourth Amendment).

A lot can be explained about how antis think by looking at this video about how the brain works. Gun grabbing propaganda relies mostly on Fast Brain activity; protection of RKBA/2a on Slow Brain.

HAHA No this does not make me feel better because the bill would still contain the one part that effects all guns not just “AW’s” Magazine capacity limits. which Harry Reid said he “wants to take a look at.” We need to make our voices heard on this magazine limit because it’s a back door way at banning 100’s of different firearms. People in NV, Ark, NC, LA, MT and FL better scream bloody murder and this whole magazine capacity loses steam in the Senate, at that point the magazine provision will get broken out into a separate amendment much like the AWB and both can be voted down and die on DiFi desk.

Douchebag RHINOs are just *looking* for an excuse to vote in favor of some new gun legislation. We already know who the progressives are. Don’t trust lying-liar, “fold-like-a-lawn-chair” establishment republicans, either.

I will not relax yet. No offense to people in AWB states but I am reassured that thoes acting at a state level is a show of no confidence on a federal level. But I am not ready to call this DOA just yet, even since childhood getting my hopes up almost always leads to dissapointment.

In other news I found 3 Gen II Maglevel Pmags for $19 each, brand new in the package.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell already said he will oppose a AWB also the Democrat from Arkansas said a outright no to Dofi’s (Hags) AWB. So some good news for today. Remember keep the calls and pressure UP!!!!

I don’t know. I wouldn’t write any legislation off as dead till it’s completely dead. I’m a history major, and I’m writing my senior thesis on the NFA. This time around, it feels too much like ’34 for me to be completely comfortable. You have politicians reassuring everyone that legitimate sporting guns won’t be affected, high level government reports stating that these types of weapons have no place on the street, and politicians pontificating that something must be done. Most importantly, you have an overly broad bill, that was widely opposed. Then, those pushing for the ban compromised, and it passed with no resistance. (NFA required registration of all concealable firearms, but by removing “sporting” pistols and revolvers, it became just about Machine Guns, SBR and SBS)

Today’s commonsense compromise could easily with changes in demographics and firearms preferences become tomorrow’s albatross. We need a firm line. Otherwise, we are going to be left telling incredulous grand kids about how you could at one time walk into a gun store and buy a semi automatic rifle.

[Leadership prefers the former, as it would give more conservative Democrats the chance to publicly say they beat back the ban.]

This is the part that really ticks me off. “Leadership” keeps telling us they have “polls” proving that a huge majority, including a huge majority of NRA members, want an AWB. Yet they’re concerned about providing cover for members of their own party who will be voted out of office by gun-rights voters if it passes.